Having said that, your assertion places even more blame on Islam.
Ok, point conceded, most of my reading is from post 9/11 Thomas Friedman. He presented and defended the thesis that guys like Bin Laden attracted followers from economically marginalized walks of life. Having said that, your assertion places even more blame on Islam.
Islam is an excuse. Many of these terrorists are very recently radicalized and most are extremely ignorant of their own religion. It's not upset scholars who are driving trucks into crowds or strapping bombs to themselves
Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk
It that good?
Of course thats what the Islamic State says, what do you expect them to say? The official policy of ISIS has very little connection to the motivations of self rasicalized nutjobs, usually raised in secular society, who live 1000 miles from the nearest training facility.
Can you delve deeper into how they "self" radicalize? Presumably since you seem to disagree that the Koran inspires violence, you don't think they're just sitting there reading the Koran to themselves. It seems they read, learn from, listen to, and/or are inspired by ISIS or similar radicals, no? So it's important what ISIS itself says about their intentions and their reasons
What motivated the IRA to use terrorist attacks in the UK?
What motivated the IRA to use terrorist attacks in the UK?
What motivated the IRA to use terrorist attacks in the UK?
we can go ahead and call the IRA an enemy of the west too, that's fine with me. To answer the question though iirc it was to separate Northern Ireland from GB, 20 years ago
To equate the IRA with Isis might be the stupidest thing ever posted on the boards. And that is saying something.
The reality is that each terrorist movement is different in its origins and motivations, but it seems like colonialism (and policies that are functionally extensions of colonialism) is a fundamental cause of terrorist activity. Western imperialist intervention in Arab nations seems to fit the bill. Drone strikes, Western-funded militias and repressive governments, and the petrol-capital apparatus level cities, impoverish generations, and wipe out the public sphere, which produces the terrorists (and sympathetic mindset) that will someday attack the West on its own turf, etc. etc. etc.
That narrative feels a bit different from what is currently happening, though, and may be giving groups like ISIS and Boko Haram (who are arguably worse than ISIS) too much credit for what actually seems more like a culture war.
While the right isn't willing to admit that there are consequences to decades of brutal foreign policy (that persist in the interest of capital as much as it does in the interest of peace and stability), the left isn't willing to consider the reality that the messenger/message is different from the terrorism that emerged from the post-colonial-era. Both perspectives get us to this point, IMO.
ETA: and re: tintin's post that I quoted - the "West," generally speaking, needs to stop creating its own enemies